this post was submitted on 09 Sep 2023
1663 points (97.6% liked)
Memes
45726 readers
1063 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Speaking of the headline, politicians when encouraged to attempt peace through negotiation rather than insisting on decisive victory being the only way
can't tell if this is some genuine post, or pro-russia shilling for peace negotiationing between Ukraine and Russia
Can't you shill for peace and be pro Ukraine?
No, because you cannot make a peace contract with a liar and thief, he will break it as soon as it fits him
He has zero regard for civilised relations between countries. Suing for peace he sees as weakness, violence as strength. A person who thinks this way can never be convinced to leave others alone. The only way is a defeat so thorough they are unable to retaliate in decades even if they try their hardest. Or death. Preferably death.
I didn't say they should ask nicely for a peace treaty.
That is true but that does not answer the question. My opinion is that if you are pro peace you are automatically pro Russia, pro Ukraine or ideally both (I'm talking about the people and culture in it and not their leaders).
Again, if peace means another war as soon as putler has recovered - versus defeating the asshole as hard as possible - then it is advantageous to putler. So, arguing for peace at the moment, is arguing for the attackers advantage.
Of course there will be peace. Once putler is defeated or preferably dead.
Oh, Putin + Hitler = Putler. Took me a moment.
It's okay to be scared. It's okay to want the war to stop because you're scared. It's okay to want peace, but
hits the nail on the head. Putin pulled the war Genie out of it's bottle and it won't go back in until his regime is defeated. It's okay to want peace and to fight for it, but to argue they need to negotiate now is either completely tone deaf or outright advocacy for Putin's regime.
I am not arguing for Putin, I am arguing for the people in this war.
But yes I see your point. Maybe NATO could threaten with nuclear war if Russia ever attacks anything again, but that won't change the problem.
I think the only way to stop Putin is with a revolution inside of Russia.
Russia promised that they would be a democratic country but since Putin's "democratic" elections that promise was broken.
In my country we have a law inside the core of our basic lawbook that enables every institution and every human being living in the country to stop a dictatorship to arise by force because it is treated as self defense.
Schland detektiert
Yes
It depends on the terms of that peace. If Russia wants peace, they can withdraw to their 1997 treaty borders. They can not be allowed to hold Ukraine land gained through conquest.
You can, but those aren't criticising the West and Ukraine, but rather russia.
Huh? Not sure what you're saying.
Okay entertain me and tell me how you would convince Putin to end his invasion peacefully.
At this point? There's probably no way he'll end it peacefully. But peace, in my mind, means the war ending, and the only acceptable way, that will bring actual peace, is for Russia to give up or be defeated.
Wishing for peace doesn't mean I'm asking for each side to join hands and sing kumbaya.
It's not our job to negotiate but the problem really is that nobody even wants to negotiate.
But in a war you will negotiate and if that's before everybody clubs their heads in or after that.
But what happened after the day the Russians attacked: Immediately everybody was completely polarized by the media: Either you're pro NATO (or pro Ukraine but at this point it's more or less the same) or pro Russia.
But the gentleman woman or whatever their gender is, that you replied as well as me and many others don't want politics centered on war against Russia, why not peace for Ukraine because, or course Russia's invasion is not justified from the NATO expansions, but if we club our heads in in Ukraine, what will to the people there and in small parts in Russia? They loose their family their own life and as well as their homes and (some aspects of their) culture.
War is always bad and I see your point that Putin is a war mongoring asshole, but give peace a chance. 🕊️
Yes war is hell, people die, families are torn apart, parents burry their children. Putin started this war, he didn't have to and he could stop it with a word but he doesn't. He keeps doubling down. It's not that no one wants peace. Everyone wants peace. What they each want to negotiate for peace is incompatible with the other. Ukraine wants it's land and sovereignty back. Putin's regime wants that land and sovereignty over Ukraine. There's nothing to negotiate for when your goals are so incompatible. There's nothing to negotiate for when your land is occupied. There's nothing to negotiate for when your opponent will only use that opportunity to come back stronger than before. If somehow Putin could offer something impossible that would prevent Russia from ever invading Ukraine again then MAYBE there can be a peace and that's probably Putin's head on a platter.
I think peace could be made it there would be a civil war against Putin or a coup d'etat and I am surprised it has not happened yet.
But yeah I see your point but I think we should always strive for peace and I think that it could be possible for somebody to stop Putler without destroying Ukraine, Russia or worse, the entire fucking world.
We are all one fucking button away from two suns in the sunset.
I would love that to be true, I wish it was possible to stop Putin without blowing up half of Europe and threatening the rest of the world. I sincerely wish you were right, but that's not the world we live in right now.
Well you start by skinning the toes and feet, and work your way up the legs.
Considering the Ukrainian position is basically "any loss of territory is unacceptable", there is little room for both peace negotiation AND support for Ukraine simultaneously. Tough position.
I don't see it as tough. Wishing for peace doesn't mean I want Ukraine to surrender.
Fair enough. I guess I've spent too much time seeing disingenuous calls for "peace" on the internet, mostly by pro-russia shills, with the intent of painting the western support of Ukraine as evil warmongering or something.
We do wish for peace ultimately, but there's a whole lot of violence to happen if it is going to be on Ukrainian terms, because russia does not look like it wants to back down.
You word it like Ukraine is somehow responsible for the violence because she won’t back down.
This entire clusterfuck is Putin’s fault. Not wanting to give up territory is completely understandable.
I think you're putting words in my mouth, never did I imply or think that Ukraine is responsible for what is happening, or that Ukraine is not right in wanting all their territory back. However, it is factual that if Ukraine wants to secure its territory, which is entirely justified, it will not be by means that are describable as "peace" or "peaceful", because russia is not backing down like complete idiots(a common theme).
Is what I am saying false?
I agree with the other guy, you're wording it in a way that is attributing all the agency to Ukraine and none to Russia. It probably would lead to much more needless death in the long run, because it sets the stage for additional aggression. Which of course would be staged from a much more consolidated position that would be much harder to roll back than if Ukraine just rolls it back now.
Thank you for finding a way to word it better than I did, that’s exactly what I meant.
kinda depends on whether or not you want Ukraine to give up crimea.
I want Ukraine to beat back Russia and the war to end. That's a wish for peace.
that's basically the decisive victory from the comment I originally replied to though.
As the red starred soldiers give up to the blue banded I've got an opinion on that topic.
not sure why you are facepalming, I live in a neighboring country to Ukraine and a lot of people here according to polls think that Ukraine should just give up Crimea and accept peace.
From the rest of the world's point of view, Ukraine had already accepted it's loss in 2014.
It was only when Russia went "well we'll have the rest of the country as well then!" that all the other countries decided to help out. Because Europe's been here before. Nobody stops after just one country. It's like Jaffa Cakes. You just keep going until there's none left.
"Guys, give up and get yourselves colonized, we're mildly inconvenienced!"
Peace in our time!
That's the frying pan saying "at least I'm not as bad as the fire!"
that makes no sense what you just wrote
If Russia stops fighting, the war ends. If Ukraine stops fighting, Ukraine ends. And Russia is more likely to try again in another neighbor. Like they have multiple times already.
Letting Russia consolidate its territorial gains, build bases and continue the war in a few years is a terrible idea. They are more than welcome to turn their tanks around and leave Ukraine.